An Islamic Approach to Humanities

An Islamic Approach to HumanitiesAsad Zaman

Vice Chancellor, PIDE, Islamabad,[email protected]

Abstract: The methodology of science is suitable formaterial substances subject to laws, but not forhumans with free will. “Social science” was born fromthe misconception that application of the scientificmethod to human beings and societies would lead toremarkable progress. However, this approach has failedin many ways, which is documented in this paper. Islamprovides us with a radically different approach to thestudy of human beings and societies, predicated onhuman freedom to choose between good and evil. Thisapproach is delineated in this paper.Keywords: Positivism, Freedom of choice, Morality,Scientific method, Revelation.

1. IntroductionThe message of God to human beings starts withthe imperative “Read!” and goes on to introducethe Creator of Heavens and Earth as the One whotaught man that which he did not know. Thisknowledge, given to illiterate and backwardArabs, allowed them to overtake establishedcivilizations of the Chinese, Persians, andRomans. Historian Marshall Hodgson (1974, p.71) attests to the power of thisknowledge as follows: “Soon after the founding ofthe faith, Muslims succeeded in building a newform of society, which in time carried with itits own distinctive institutions, its art andliterature, its science and scholarship, its

1

Asad Zaman 2

political and social forms, as well as its cultand creed, all bearing an unmistak-able Islamicimpress. In the course of centuries, this newsociety spread over widely diverse climes,throughout most of the Old World. It came closerthan any had ever come to uniting all mankindunder its ideals.”It was prophesied that Islam came as a stranger

and will soon become a stranger. Chittick (1998)writes that the Islamic intellectual heritage,which was responsible for preservation,enrichment and transmission of this knowledge,“has largely been lost in the modern times.” Ourgoal in this paper is to show that Islam offersdeep insights into human conditions, and providesessential foundations for any attempt to studyhuman societies. We have deliberately used theterm “humanities” because a second goal of thepaper is to show that the Western attempt toapply the scientific method to the study of humanbeings – reflected in the name “social science” –has proven to be a failure.

2. Two Western Misconceptions About ScienceAs a result of a long and complex historicalprocess sketched in Zaman (2013) two majormisconceptions about scientific knowledge came tobe widely believed in the West. These are:1. Science is the only valid source of

knowledge.

3 An Islamic Approach to Humanities

2. The methodology of science is based solelyon observations and logic.

These ideas are clearly opposed to Islam,according to which the Revelation is the mostcertain source of knowledge, while all otherhuman knowledge is uncertain and doubtful.Similarly, the Qur’ān (2:3) starts by describingthose who are Allah-conscious as those whobelieve in the unseen. It follows that the ideathat all valid knowledge is based on observationsand logic is obviously false. These arguments aresufficient to show the inherent incompatibilitybetween Islamic and Western epistemology. The twopropositions can also be contested on seculargrounds, as we discuss below.We have many sources of knowledge which are not

“scientific” in the sense of being derived fromobservations of patterns in the real world.Children are born with knowledge of how to smile,cry, express their demands, and also empathy.Empirical studies bear out the claim of theQur’ān (55:1-55:4) – “We created man, and taughthim how to speak.” Noam Chomsky showed thatchildren must have innate knowledge of anunderlying universal grammar, in order to be ableto pick up languages with the ease that theydisplay; see Pinker(2007) for an exposition. Avast proportion of essential knowledge that wehave is based on experience such as swimming,driving, understanding how others feel, and soon. Experiences are subjective and not easily

Asad Zaman 4

communicable to others, making this knowledgenon-scientific.Similarly, the idea that scientific knowledge

is based purely on observations and logic iswrong. Again, the story of how this wrong ideacame to be widely believed in the West is longand complicated. Manicas (1987) provides adetailed history of the key philosophical ideas.For our purposes, it is sufficient to understandthat there are two different approaches tomethodology – nominalist and realist. Accordingto the dominant nominalist approach, our onlyaccess to the real world is through ourobservations. If there is a reality hiddenunderneath the observations, this reality is notaccessible to us. Science deals only withobservables, and not with the underlying hiddenreality. This position was most forcefullyadvocated by the logical positivists, and becamenearly universally accepted in the early part ofthe twentieth century. Some details of theemergence of logical positivism, and how itclashes with Islamic philosophy is provided inZaman ( Dec 2013). Logical positivism had a“spectacular crash” as it became clear in themid-twentieth century that the fundamental tenetsof this philosophy were wrong. An accessibleaccount of the rise and fall of logicalpositivism is provided by Suppes (1977). Suppesalso shows that despite the fall of positivism,many ideas associated with this failed philosophy


continue to be widely believed. In particular,social sciences, and especially economics, havebeen heavily influenced by logical positivism.While some of the social sciences have beenrevised in light of the failure of logicalpositivism, no adjustments have been made in themethodology of economics.The alternative to the nominalist philosophy of

science is “realism”. Even though reality isinaccessible, observations provide us with enoughclues to enable us to deduce the nature ofreality. According to the realist understandingof science, science works by using observationsto infer existence of objects, forces, and causalrelations which cannot be observed – for example,electrons, gravity, and quantum effects. Manicas(2006) has provided a detailed book lengthargument about why nominalism is a mistakenphilosophy of science and argued in favor of therealist position. Zaman (2012) shows that thenominalist philosophy has led to seriousmethodological problems in econometrics and howthese can be rectified by moving to a realistposition. Note that the realist position isstrongly supported by Islam, which teaches usthat all of the creation is full of signs whichenable us to recognize the Creator. Accepting therealist position implies that progress in sciencerequires going beyond the apparent and theobservable to the underlying realities. As weshall see, Western social sciences are not well-equipped to move in this direction, whereas Islam

Asad Zaman 6

provides us with substantial guidance on how thiscan be done.

3. Three Major Problems with Social ScienceIn the early twentieth century, logicalpositivists argued forcefully that the only validform of human knowledge was science, and this wasbased solely on observations and logic.Furthermore, scientific knowledge had to bequantifiable and measurable. All of thesepropositions later turned out to be wrong, butthey had a profound influence on the socialsciences. Influential intellectuals like C. P.Snow argued that the modern age requiredmathematical literacy, and knowledge of the lawsof thermodynamics was just as important, if notmore, than Shakespeare. The humanities struggledto become like science so as to achieverespectability. To do so, they adopted the thendominant logical positivist analysis of themethodology of science. This was a doublemistake. In the first place, radical differencesbetween the nature of science and the nature ofhuman beings necessitate use of differentmethodologies for the respective fields. Thiserror was compounded by a misunderstanding of thenature of scientific methodology. It would takeus too far afield to discuss the complex andtangled history of how this came to pass (seeManicas, 1987). Instead, we will list threeimportant consequences of this double mistake.


3.1 Morality is Just NoiseOne of the leading positivists Ayer (1936) wrotethat: “ethical judgments …have no objectivevalidity whatsoever. They are pure expressions offeeling and … unverifiable for the same reason asa cry of pain”. This position came to be widelybelieved, with disastrous consequences. Until thetwentieth century, intellectuals had assumed thattruth had moral dimensions, and had sought tofind a ‘scientific’ basis to establish moralpropositions. This project was abandoned asimpossible, and replaced by the idea that moralpropositions were as meaningless as a cry ofpain. Charters of colleges and universities hadexplicitly sought to build character andinculcate a sense of civic duty among students.However, the idea that morality was not part ofhuman knowledge, led to gradual abandonment ofthis goal, as well as, removal of courses like‘Civics’ from the syllabi. Reuben (1996) hasdescribed the historical process by whichmorality was removed from the educational goalsof US universities. What were the results of the abandonment of the

mission of building character, and instilling asense of civic and social responsibility amongstudents? Over the past century there has been adistinct and measurable decline in moralstandards in the West. This has been documentedby many authors. Most graphically, an awardwinning book by Zygmunt Bauman (1989) argues thatmodern secular democracies create no barriers

Asad Zaman 8

against the scientific elimination of a sub-population, if this is considered favorable tothe group interests. As an illustration, USAmbassador Madeleine Albright did not feelembarrassed to declare on public TV that thelives of half a million Iraqi children were aworthwhile cost to pay for achievement of USpolitical goals in the Middle East. Hollywood movies now depict assassins,prostitutes, thieves, and criminals as heroes,whereas this was not possible fifty years ago.Halberstam (2002) has documented how studentstrained at the finest US educational institutionsfelt no compunctions in scientific mass murdersof innocent Vietnamese population. A 2008Josephson Institute survey of high schoolstudents showed that large numbers cheat, stealand lie, and worse, do not find these actionsmorally objectionable. As a consequence of lackof moral development, the leader of the freeworld has signed more than 300 lists of victimsto be assassinated, killing over 3000 civilians,without regret or remorse1. Klein (2007) writesthat the CIA Kubark Manual represents the firstgenuine advances in the ancient art of torture incenturies. The Congress has approved torture,renditions, and indefinite detentions of childrenand civilians without any charge or trial. Movies

1 See “Secret ‘Kill List’ tests Obama” in New York Times,May 29, 2012, and “Obama’s Drone Killing Campaigns” inCounterpunch, Oct. 24, 2013.


celebrating torturers and extra-legal actionshave been made to justify these to the public. 3.2 Mechanization of Human Behavior

In order to apply scientific methodology tohumans, it is necessary to deny their essential freedom. The mostinfluential school of psychology in the twentiethcentury does precisely that. Skinner (1972) laidout the foundations of ‘Behavioral Psychology’,which basically treats human beings as robots whocan be programed by appropriate stimulus-responsesequences. This school, which ignores feelings,motivations and other non-measurable andunobservable aspects, rose to dominance in theUSA precisely because it was ‘scientific’.Just as positivism collapsed against the weight

of evidence, so the behavioral school ofpsychology has received many setbacks. Anexcellent illustration of the type of problemcreated by denying unobservables is the “theoryof revealed preference” due to Samuelson.Economic theory was regarded as ‘un-scientific’because it utilized the idea of the utilityderived from consumption – this was a feelingwhich was not observable. Following thebehavioral idea, we can translate thisunobservable to the observable choices made bythe consumer. The unobservable hidden preferenceis revealed by the observable choice behavior:the consumers choose X over Y when they prefer Xto Y and when consuming X generates greater

Asad Zaman 10

utility than consuming Y. Samuelson sought tomake Economics a science by replacing theunobservable preferences and utilities by theobservable choices. A number of authorscontributed to the field, and ultimately came upwith a set of axioms on choices which were shownto be equivalent to the standard axioms onpreferences. The Nobel Prize awarded to Samuelsonmentions this feat of turning economics into ascience by removing reference to the unobservableutilities. However, as Wong (2002) has pointed out at book

length, this was a hollow victory. Samuelson wasmistaken in thinking that he had eliminatedunobservables by replacing preference withchoices. Imagine a person who has achieved theBuddhist ideal of complete indifference toworldly affairs. All worldly choices are the sameto him. In this case, there is no reason for hischoices to obey any axioms, or display anypattern or consistency. The axiom of transitivityimposed on choices reflects our understanding ofthe nature of human preferences. The observablechoices display regularities only because theyare based on the invisible utilities that wederive from consumption, and the stability ofthese feelings. It is important to note that this is an

illustration of the ‘second mistake’ – the ideathat the methodology of science is based purelyon observations and logic. Scientific theories


utilize many unobservables like positrons, energyquanta, gravity, electro-magnetic forces andothers. Positivists thought that all theseunobservables could be replaced by equivalents interms of observables, but this turned out to be amistake. This mistaken understanding ofscientific methodology was made the basis of thedevelopment of a methodology for social science,and the attempt was made to remove allunobservables from social science theories. Asjust illustrated, this attempt fails, and onemust refer to unobservables in order tounderstand human behavior. Despite this failure,no serious attempts have been made to revisefundamental methodological principles ofeconomics. Karacuka and Zaman (2012) provide along list of examples showing that economicmodels are extremely poor at explaining actualobserved human behavior because they neglect‘unobservable’ dimensions of human motivations.3.3 The Search for Simple Universal Laws

The achievement of Newton in utilizing a simplelaw to provide an explanation for a variety ofphysically observed phenomena was universallyadmired. As Mirowski (1990) documents, theprestige of physics led neoclassical economiststo copy models from physics “term for term,symbol for symbol”. The idea of appropriating themethodology of physics for use in economics hashad immensely harmful consequences. Economistslook for simple universal laws of economics,which are invariant across time and space, just

Asad Zaman 12

like the laws of physics. Thus methodology ofscience (as misunderstood by economists)restricts the subject of economics to those lawsand principles which operate equally in theMiddle East, Africa, Latin America and Europe.These laws must also be invariant across time aswell, holding equally for colonial India,contemporary Chile and Brazil, as well as pre-and post-unification Germany. Because historicalevents are particular, special, and unique, theyhave no place in a scientific study of invariantlaws. After all, the law of gravity continued tohold without any change before, during and afterthe World Wars. It is a dangerous illusion to think that we can

understand the economics of twentieth centuryEurope without any reference to the two WorldWars – yet modern economic theory tries to doexactly this. Similarly it is impossible tounderstand development and under-developmentwithout understanding the history of colonialismand imperialism. However, today one can get aPh.D. in economics without studying any of themajor historical events which shaped the economiclandscape of the twentieth century. It is naturalto study economic events within their historicalcontext, and this was the dominant approach tothe subject throughout the nineteenth century.However, an extremely important “battle ofmethodologies” between the German historicalschool and Menger’s Austrian school led to a


decisive victory for the scientific quantitativeand a-historical methodology of the Austrianschool. The consequence, documented by Hodgson(2002) was the removal of historical andqualitative elements from the methodology ofmodern economics. Many famous economists are on the record as

asserting that the status of economic theories ison par with that of physics as a science. Thusthe law of supply and demand is like the law ofgravity. However, no act of parliament orcongress can have the slightest impact on theoperations of the law of gravity. But ifparliaments act to support prices or wages, theirlegislation will override the law of supply anddemand to determine the price or wage. The law ofsupply and demand states that if the legislatedminimum wage is above the equilibrium level,unemployment will result. Yet extensive empiricalinvestigation by Card (1995) found no support forthis proposition. The most dramatic failure ofthe law of supply and demand is furnished by theGreat Depression, which created unemploymentrates of above 20% for more than a decade.Keynesian Economics was invented to explain thisphenomenon, and argued that real wages weresticky in the downward direction, preventing thelaw of supply and demand from operating. Ariely(2009, Chapter 4) provides many more examples ofthe failure of the law of supply and demand inthe real world. Just using the word “law” and

Asad Zaman 14

claiming that economics is like physics does notactually provide economics with the universallaws that it seeks on the basis of the borrowedmethodology of physics.

4. The Consequences of FreedomThis world was created as test for human beings.Both the desire for evil [12:53] and theknowledge of the good [9:49, 75:14] have beenimplanted within the human heart, and the test isto see who can rise above temptations and chosethe good. Holy Qur’ān states:“Blessed is He in Whose hand is the Sovereignty,and He is Able to do all things. Who has createdlife and death that He may try you as to whichof you is best in conduct; and He is the Mighty,Forgiving” [67:1,2]Had Allah (SWT)2 desired it, he could havecompelled everyone to obedience (32:13), butsince the purpose of the creation was to testmen, He implanted within the heart of everyhuman being, simultaneously, the potential fortremendous good and tremendous evil. He thenshowed him what is good and what is bad.“Have We not shown him the two ways (of good andevil)? [90:10]”In initial shaping, Allah created man with agood “nature” and gave him the liberty to choose

2 For meaning, please see Glossary in the Intro- pages ofthe issue.


the good or the bad path. It is man’s choice,what he eventually becomes.“Verily, We create man in the best conformation;and thereafter We reduce him to the lowest oflow [95:4,595:4,5]”Thus man can rise above the angels or fall to beworse than the beasts. Those who struggle againsttheir lowly desires will find the path to theirLord (29:69, 79:40,41), and achieve the potentialfor excellence present within their souls. The ability to make free choices brings great

rewards and also carries with it a greatresponsibility. We must acquire knowledge of thechoices facing us, learn to differentiate betweenright and wrong, and also choose the right patheven when this is made difficult by external andinternal circumstances. This gift of volition, offree choice, was offered to the others among thecreations of Allah, but they all refused it andshrank from the responsibility [33:72] .Humanbeings accepted this gift of freedom, but havenot been able to fulfill the associatedresponsibility for the most part. That is menhave been foolish – failed to learn of and toevaluate the choices facing them; and evil – theyhave failed to choose the best action even whenthey had knowledge of it. One implication of this verse is that most of

creation is subject to laws, and hasdeterministic behavior – and hence is subject tostudy by scientific methods. However, human

Asad Zaman 16

beings have a certain amount of freedom in theirchoices and hence their behavior cannot bedescribed via universal and invariantmathematical laws. We discuss the implications offreedom in greater detail, to establish that thescientific method is of extremely limited valuein studying human beings and societies.4.1 The Purpose of Human Existence

Human beings have different ends and prioritiesfor themselves.“Verily, (the ends) you strive for are diverse.

[92:4]”It is only within the context of these diversemotives that we can understand human behavior.Human beings are free to choose their goals, andchanging these goals is a key to creatingpositive changes. Instead of striving for avariety of often conflicting goals, the Qur’ānencourages us to develop a single minded focus onone goal:“Say: Lo! my worship and, my sacrifice and myliving and my dying are for Allah, Lord of theWorlds. [6:162]

As the Qur’ān [51:56] states, human beings werecreated for this purpose – to obey and worshipAllah. However they are free to choose othergoals for themselves. In general, men have anexcessive love of wealth and material possessions[100:8]. However, this love must be overcome, or


else it will lead to a bad end [92:8; 92:10].This requires constant struggle, as we have beengiven a disposition to like evil; this is whatcreates a test. If there was no tendency towardsevil then there would be no test. If we succeedin this trial by continuously choosing good overevil, this purifies the heart and allows us torealize the potential for excellence within eachhuman being. If we fail by choosing the desiresof our nafs over the good, this leads us to becomeworse than the beasts.“Those who believe, and suffer exile and strivewith might and main, in Allah’s cause, withtheir goods and their persons, have thehighest rank in the sight of Allah; they arethe people who will achieve (salvation)”.[9:20]

The purpose of our study is to learn how tocreate the transformation towards excellence inhuman beings. We must also learn how to organizesocieties so as to bring out and nourish the besttendencies within human beings. The purpose ofIslamic social organization is described in thefollowing verse of the holy Qur’ān:“Those who, if We establish them in the land,establish regular salah and give regular zakah,enjoin the right and forbid wrong: with Allahrests the end (and decision) of (all) affairs.[22:41]

It is only with reference to these goals that itis possible to evaluate human and social

Asad Zaman 18

activity. It is impossible to study human beingsand societies without knowing the purpose ofhuman existence. According to standard secularWestern thought, human life is meaningless. As Bertrand Russell (1903) puts poetically:

“That man is the product of causeswhich had no prevision of the end theywere achieving; that his origin, hisgrowth, his hopes and fears, his lovesand his beliefs, are but the outcome ofaccidental collocations of atoms; thatno fire, no heroism, no intensity ofthought and feeling, can preserve anindividual life beyond the grave; thatall the labors of the ages, all thedevotion, all the inspiration, all thenoonday brightness of human genius, aredestined to extinction in the vastdeath of the solar system, and that thewhole temple of Man's achievement mustinevitably be buried beneath the debrisof a universe in ruins -- all thesethings, if not quite beyond dispute,are yet so nearly certain, that nophilosophy which rejects them can hopeto stand. Only within the scaffoldingof these truths, only on the firmfoundation of unyielding despair, canthe soul’s habitation henceforth besafely built”.


But if human life is ultimately meaningless,then the study of human beings is equallymeaningless. This is all the more so if humanbeings are deterministic robots, as suggested bySkinner (1977). If we have no choices to make,then our study of human beings and society isequally constrained to be whatever it must be.4.2 An Important Inversion: Using the World forSpiritual Struggle

Because of materialist focus on measurableoutcomes, even Muslims sometimes forget thatwhile we are required to struggle for justice, wewill not be evaluated on the basis of outcomes.Prophet Mohammad (SAW)3 was required to spreadthe message of Islam, but was told that guidancetowards Islam was entirely in the hands of Allah.Similarly, there have been prophets who did notsucceed in converting anyone to the message thatthey carried. Nonetheless, they will be countedamong the successful because they carried out thestruggle to spread the message, which is all theAllah (SWT) requires.In Christianity and Buddhism, and many other

traditions, spiritual progress demands isolationand withdrawal from the world. Islam offers aradically different approach: spiritual progressis the result of our engagement and struggle withthe world, along the lines commanded by Allah(SWT). For example, it is not the meat and blood3 For meaning, please see Glossary in the Intro- pages ofthe issue.

Asad Zaman 20

of our sacrifices which reaches Allah (SWT), butthe spirit with which the sacrifice is done.Similarly, we are required to feed the poor forthe sake of the love of Allah (SWT) – the sameact done with the intention of acquiring fame andpopularity is not acceptable. The generalprinciple is that we must use our lives andwealth to earn paradise:“Behold, Allah has bought of the believerstheir lives and their possessions, promisingthem paradise in return”. [9:111]

The same principle which applies at theindividual level also applies at the sociallevel. An Islamic state is an effort to realizethe spiritual by material means through humanorganization. In popular idiom, it is not whetheryou win or lose, but how you play the game thatmatters. Islam is process oriented, more thanoutcome oriented. Whereas conventional wisdom isconcerned with the achievement of favorableoutcomes, Islam is concerned with how to carryout the struggle for justice, whether or not thisoutcome is achieved. If the outcome is achieved,that is a gift from God and an added-value.4.3 Engaged Participation instead of DetachedObservation

An important scientific methodological principleis that of objectivity; one must be a neutral anddetached observer in pursuit of scientific truth.Lack of neutrality may result in biased judgments


and consequent errors in analysis. This may be areasonable principle for the study of materialssubject to laws (though even here, scientists arefrequently passionate about their theories). Thisprinciple is completely inappropriate for thestudy of humans and societies. In fact, Islamprohibits us from remaining neutral when we seeinjustice:Abu Saeed al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with

him) relates that: “I heard the Messenger ofAllah (PBUH) saying, “Whosoever of you sees anevil, let him change it with his hand; and if heis not able to do so, then [let him try changingit] with his tongue; and if he is not able to doeven that, then with his heart (consider it to bebad in his heart) — and that is the weakestdegree of faith.” [Muslim Book 1 (Faith) aḥādīth79 and 81]This difference between the scientific method

and the Islamic approach is directly due to humanfreedom to choose between good and evil. Whenstudying material objects subject to laws, thequestion of good and evil does not arise.However, in studying human beings and societieswhere there is a constant struggle between goodand evil both on an individual and on a sociallevel, Islam requires us to struggle for thegood, and does not allow us to remain neutral.The requirement to be engaged in an effort tochange the world also creates another radicaldifference between the Islamic approach andconventional scientific methodology. Islamic

Asad Zaman 22

source materials strongly suggest that it is inthe process of struggle that we will be providedwith the relevant knowledge:“And those who strive in Our (cause),- We willcertainly guide them to our Paths: For verilyAllah is with those who do right”. [29:69]

Neutral and detached observation required byconventional (mis)-understanding of scientificmethodology will not generate knowledge. Whenactions are chosen according to social norms, apositive and objective description will fail toachieve understanding and explanation requiredfor scientific analysis. For example, suppose weobserve someone driving at the maximum legalspeed of 55 miles per hour. This purely positiveand objective fact hides within it the fact thatthe driver chose to adhere to legal norms. Thisobjective fact would have changed had the legalnorms been different, or if the driver had chosennot to obey them. Understanding norms and reasonsfor which human being choose to adhere to normsor to violate them is essential to understandingbehavior. A purely objective description whichdoes not take the normative elements into accountwill be unsatisfactory. As another example, consider the question: are

people selfish or cooperative?, whichincidentally is the title of Section II inLedyard’s (1995) survey of Public Goods. This isa valid question based on the idea that


scientific methodology consists of descriptionand observation. However, from the Islamic pointof view, all human beings have the potential forgood and evil, and hence both characteristics aresimultaneously present within all human beings.Different types of environments can evoke one orthe other type of behavior, and this is also whatthe experiments show. Depending on how thesituation is framed, different types of culturalnorms may be evoked, leading to different typesof behavior. Man’s freedom to choose to follownorms or to violate them leads to a failure ofthe scientific methodology.

5. The Essential Importance of NormsThe positivists argued that norms are notscientific knowledge. That is true – norms cannotbe derived from observations and logic. Theirmistaken idea that science is the only validsource of knowledge led them to the conclusionthat there can be no valid knowledge aboutmorals. Indeed it is true that knowledge aboutmorality can only be acquired through Revelation.In some sense, Muslims are in agreement with thesecular position: knowledge about morality cannotbe obtained by reason, but only by revelation. Ofcourse, since secular thinkers do not believe inrevelation, they are forced to conclude thatthere can be no knowledge about morals.5.1 Failure of Secular Approaches to Morality

First, we briefly review two standard secularapproaches to morality, and show that both are

Asad Zaman 24

failures. One approach is based on consensus:whatever members of a society agree to, is moral.In the 1970’s, homosexuality was listed as amental disorder in the official manual of theAmerican Psychological Association. It wasconsidered a social evil and was also a criminaloffense. In 1990’s, homosexuality was classifiedas a normal behavior, and legislation to supportgay marriages was passed in many states. Todisapprove of this act and to speak against it inpublic became a criminal offense. Obviously,social consensus does not provide a stable basisfor the construction of norms. The second secular approach to morality is via

utilitarianism. The ultimate and only goal ofhuman existence is the pursuit of pleasure inthis life. Anything which contributes to pleasureis moral, while anything which causes pain isimmoral. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of thisphilosophy, considered himself to be a prophetand explicitly proposed this as a new religionfor mankind. Unfortunately, on key matters, thisphilosophy fails to provide guidance. If thesociety decides that the greater good of thegreater number will be achieved by scientificextermination of six million Jews, utilitarianismcannot pose any objections. Similarly, if someonepursues short term pleasures which harm bothsociety and him in the long run, utilitarianscannot persuade him to make sacrifices againsthis perceived self interest. The contradictions


between social and individual interests and longand short run pleasures cannot be resolved. Sothis philosophy fails to provide a satisfactorybasis for morals.Note that we are not arguing that secular

atheists behave immorally; such people can, andoften do, choose to behave morally. We arearguing that there is no logical basis forderivation of morals on secular grounds.

5.2 All Human Behavior is Value Laden

Human lives are infinitely precious. As theQur’ān states:“… if anyone kills a human being-unless it be[in punishment] for murder or for spreadingcorruption on earth-it shall be as though hehad killed all mankind; whereas, if anyonesaves a life, it shall be as though he hadsaved the lives of all mankind” (5:32).

When we spend time on any activity, this imbuesit with value, since our actions testify to thenormative idea that this action is worth doing.In human actions, and in social sciences, thereare no neutral, value-free grounds on which onecan stand. This is in direct opposition to thewidely accepted idea of Weber that social scienceshould be value free. This idea itself is normative. Sinceit is impossible to study human beings andsociety without normative ideas, the attempt tokeep social science value-free – in order to

Asad Zaman 26

acquire the prestige of science – has led to theHIDING of moral values behind apparentlyobjective propositions. This illustratesFoucault’s thesis that “modern human sciences(biological, psychological, social) purport tooffer universal scientific truths about humannature that are, in fact, often mere expressionsof ethical and political commitments of aparticular society”.4

We give a specific and concrete example of howvalues are hidden within apparently objectiveformulations of economic theories. Economistsaccept only the Pareto principle as being validfor welfare comparisons: if everyone has more,then the society as a whole is better off. Ifincome re-distribution takes place then socialwelfare cannot be compared as there is noscientific way to aggregate utilities or to makeinterpersonal comparisons. The Pareto principleis supposedly scientific and objective, and doesnot involve value judgments. Consider however thefollowing situation: a small group of people(0.01% of the population) control 99% of theresources and wealth in a given society. Theremaining 1% of wealth is not adequate to feed,clothe or house the remaining 99.99% of thepopulation. If we argue that there is no

4Quoted from entry on Michel Foucault in StanfordEncyclopaedia of Philosophy (accessed 23 February 2008):http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/


scientific basis for redistribution of income,then in effect we endorse the status quo. Thusthe Pareto principle implicitly states that theright of the owners of wealth to their propertyis stronger than the right of the hungry to befed. The Qur’ān teaches us the oppositeprinciple:

“The Believers are those in whose wealth is arecognized right of the needy”. (70:24)

In contradiction to the Pareto principle, theQur’ān places the right of the needy over theright to private property. The point of thisdiscussion is that the apparently objective andscientific Pareto principle hides a normativecommitment to private property. This commitmentconflicts with Islamic norms. In a similar way,as many authors have shown, economic theories arebased on hidden normative principles. See forexample Zaman (Sep. 2012) and Hausman and MacPherson(2008).5.3 Norms As Guides For Our Efforts

As discussed earlier, our goal is to strive forthe good on an individual and social level. “You are indeed the best community that hasever been brought forth for [the good of]mankind: you enjoin the doing of what is rightand forbid the doing of what is wrong, and youbelieve in Allah”. (3:110)

Asad Zaman 28

Norms, which define the good, are essentialguideposts for this struggle. Without having aclear definition of the ideal state, we cannotcarry out this transformative struggle – forwhich we were created. Since knowledge aboutnorms cannot be achieved by scientific methods,the Western misconception that all humanknowledge is purely scientific led to manymistaken ideas about normative statements. Someof these relevant to our analysis are listedbelow.Error 1: It is possible to cleanly separate thenormative and positive. In fact, as Hilary Putnam (2002) has shown in a

number of essays and books, there are manystatements where the normative and the positiveare mixed in such a way that it is impossible toseparate the two components. Thus the idea thateconomics consists (or should consist) of onlyand entirely of the positive statements taken inisolation is not valid. Most economic theoryconsists of statements where positive andnormative aspects are combined. As simple illustration consider the famous

Cambridge Controversy on the measurement ofcapital. On the surface, it appears to be apurely technical and mathematical discussionabout the conditions under which capital ofdifferent types can be aggregated to come up witha single measure of the amount of capital K,


which is an input to the production function.This is essential in order to be able to definethe marginal product of capital and labor.However, underlying this purely technicalquestion is a moral concern of great importance.One of the key arguments of Karl Marx was thatreturns to capital are not justified because onlylabor produces value. In addition, he argued thatlaborers were exploited by the capitalists, andnot paid the full value of what they produced.Both of these arguments are countered by theproduction function into which capital and laborenter in a symmetric way. This means that thejustification for payments to capital is on parwith the justification of payments to labor. Inaddition, both factors are paid their marginalproduct, so that the rewards received by eachfactor is a fair and just payment for the valueproduced by each. By doing the mathematicsdifferently (for example, by introducing fixed,non-malleable capital of different vintages) wecan change the moral implications of thesemodels. The two aspects, positive and normativeare mixed and cannot be separated. Error 2: The norms are ideals which can never beachieved. Hence they are irrelevant to the realworld.Human beings are strongly motivated by social

ideals, and strive to conform to behavior whichwill be praised. The celebration of theachievements of the Brazilian football star Peléled thousands of children to try to imitate him,

Asad Zaman 30

even though none could match his achievements orrival his fame. Thus ideals strongly shapesociety even if they are impossible to achieve.For Muslims, the Prophet Mohammed S.A.W. Is a

perfect example for us in all dimensions of life.His excellence is such that it is impossible foranyone to aspire to achieve it. Yet, he serves asan inspiration in the lives of billions ofpeople. Just like the North star allows ships tonavigate in the northern direction, whileremaining unattainable as a goal, so ideals guideus even when they are remote from practicalpossibility.Error 3: Observable behavior is the proper objectof scientific study – idealized norms aresubjective and unobservable.This is a widespread misconception current

among social scientists. The idea is the peopleoften mouth high sounding ideals, while behavingin an entirely different way. We should payattention to actual observed behavior, and not bemisled by lip service to impractical ideals. Forexample, a Wall Street firm might write about itsmission of providing service, while being engagedin systematic deception of its own clients. Theempirical attitude requires us to pay attentionto the observed behavior.Recent research on social norms provides

substantial clarity on these issues; see Biccieri(2006). Social norms govern our expectations


about the behavior we expect of others as normal.Such expectations influence our own behavior. Ifwe expect others to be honest, cooperate andfulfill trusts, then our own behavior is alsoalong these lines. If we do not expect thesecharacteristics, this also impacts our ownbehavior. Furthermore, these expectations can bechanged in various ways and such changes havestrong impacts on individual behavior. Thusunobservable ideals do make a difference in realworld environments. We offer three examples as illustrations of how

“impractical” ideals affect real world outcomes.A large number of studies on philanthropy haveestablished that Muslims give substantially morein charity than other communities with comparableincomes5. Also, the research shows that thisdifference is directly due to the emphasis ongiving and generosity contained in Islamicteachings. As a second example, Pfeifer’s (2001)shows that Islamic firms in Egypt offersignificantly higher wages (and have lowerprofits) than comparable non-Islamic firms, whichhave higher profits and lower wage shares. Thisis due to Islamic teachings on the dignity oflabor. As a third example, there are severalmajor hospitals in Pakistan which have branchesrun entirely on charity. At SUIT in Karachi, Pakistan, one million patients weretreated without any charge. Similarly, the Indus5 See Najam (2007), or “Muslims are Britains top charitygivers” by Ruth Gledhill in The Times, July 20, 2013.

Asad Zaman 32

Hospital is unmatched as a private hospital whichserves all patients free of charge, and hastreated more than 1.5 million patients since itopened in 2008. The idea of providing healthcare,education, and other social services as worship –fulfilling our responsibilities to the creationof God – was introduced to the world by Muslims.Current western hegemony has reversed these ideasand turned all these into means of making aprofit, to the loss of all. 5.4 All Social Science is Guided By NormsThe main contention of this paper is that socialscience proceed by defining an ideal state, andthen examining deviations from this ideal, andhow these flaws may be rectified. Defining anideal state is obviously a normative activity,about which Islamic ideals provide us with muchguidance. In addition, the life of our ProphetMohammad S.A.W. also provides a vast amount ofpractical guidance on how we can successfullystruggle to create changes in individuals and insocieties. Many modern social scientists would claim that

their studies are objective and scientific, basedon value free descriptions and observations.After the collapse of positivism, manyalternative approaches have also emerged, andbeen adopted in different degrees in differentfields of social science. Nonetheless, sincethere is no scientific basis for norms, few


social scientists would accept the description inthe first paragraph of this section above as avalid description of their activities. Our goalin this section is to show that despite their owndisagreement, social scientists do in factpractice this same methodology in economics, aswell as in other fields. Economists posit an ideal world of perfect

competition, in which all agents selfishlymaximize their utilities, and all firms maximizeprofits. For example, one of the leadingtextbooks by Mankiw & Taylor (2006) states that:

Why do decentralized market economieswork so well? Is it because people canbe counted on to treat each other withlove and kindness? Not at all. Moderninterpretation of Smith's "invisiblehand" metaphor says that participantsin a market economy are motivated byself-interest, and that the ‘invisiblehand’ of the market place guides thisself-interest into promoting generaleconomic well-being.

It is widely and freely acknowledged that thisideal state has never existed; the required ofcomplete information to all, no transactioncosts, etc. can never be fulfilled in real life.Nonetheless, the focus of efforts of economistsis to remove imperfections which distort perfectcompetition, and strive to create a betterapproximation to this ideal state in the real

Asad Zaman 34

world. The economists claim that the idea thatall human beings behave selfishly, embodied inthe utility maximization theory in everymicroeconomic textbook, is descriptive. In fact,as many have shown, this is prescriptive –students who learn these theories of “rational”behavior, learn to be selfish, while students inother disciplines are more generous. Amiruddinand Zaman (2013) provide a detailed discussion ofthe quote from Manikiw, and show that this iswrong on many counts, including the falseattribution of the doctrine of selfishness toAdam Smith. Any study of human beings must be guided by

some purpose, which is inherently and inevitablynormative. The attempt to imitate scientificmethodology led to the hiding of this purpose,since mentioning it would attract thecontemptuous label of “un-scientific.” As aresult, modern social science is full ofnormative assumptions which have been buriedunderground, and are rarely explicitlyacknowledged. By using an explicit normativeframework, Islam offers a far more honest andcoherent approach to the humanities than iscurrently available in the west.

6. ConclusionsThere are two major areas where western socialsciences are seriously deficient:


First, there is no explicit acknowledgement ofnorms for behavior both at individual and atsocial levels. Furthermore, secular thinking isnot well equipped to deal with the purpose ofhuman existence, or to the discovery of suitablesocial and personal norms. The core message ofIslam is normative, and therefore an Islamicapproach to humanities can comfortably be builtaround an explicit purpose for human existence,and an explicit set of norms. Second, western theories do not take serious

account of human freedom. To do so wouldseriously interfere with application ofscientific methodology. Scientific theoryrequires predictable and deterministic behaviorsubject to universal laws of motion. It is clearthat freedom makes human behavior unpredictable,and not subject to description by mathematicallaws. One response to this objection was thatstatistical laws made human behavior predictablein the aggregate, even though they were notpredictable individually. There are many ways torebut this argument; one is the Black Swan themeof Nicholas Nassim Taleb (2010), who argues thatstatistics fails in certain situations which arefundamentally unpredictable.Taking human freedom seriously immediately

leads to the question of how we should use thisfreedom? This question does not arise in theproper domain of science, where objects havedeterministic behavior. For human beings, theresponse to this question is contained in the

Asad Zaman 36

guidance from Allah revealed in the form of theQur’ān. The Revelation contains vital informationabout how to evaluate choices open to us, todifferentiate between good and evil, and how tosummon the spiritual energy required to make goodchoices. These vital questions cannot beformulated within a scientific approach to thehumanities, showing the necessity of an Islamicapproach.When Ali R.A. Was asked by the extent of human

freedom, he asked the questioner to raise onefoot. When he did so, Ali R.A. Asked him to raisethe other foot as well. The lesson is that we arefree to raise one foot above the ground but notfree to raise both feet. While there aredeterministic elements in human behavior, it isessential to understand the nature of ourfreedom. Each human being is unique, with a setof life experiences that is entirely differentfrom everyone else. Each moment of our lifepresents us with unique opportunities torecognize our Creator and to take steps towardsHim. The scientific search for patterns blinds usto the unique and one-time opportunities, as wellas the unique characteristics of ourselves andothers which do not fall into patterns. Forexample, coming of communism to Russia and China,the Arab Spring, and many other events signalpossibilities for change of types never beforeseen in history. Scientific methods cannot dealwith unique events, since science based on


repeated patterns. Islamic teachings allow us torecognize these unique opportunities to reach thebest that is available to mankind. To takeadvantage of these, we must cast off the spell ofthe western sciences and study our ownintellectual heritage in obedience to the firstcommand of Allah:

“Read. In the name of thy Lord who Created”

ReferencesAmir-ud-Din, Rafi and Zaman, Asad (2013) Failuresof the 'Invisible Hand'. Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=2293940Ariely, Dan.(2009) Predictably Irrational. NY: HarperCollins.Bauman, Zygmunt (1989) Modernity and the Holocaust.USA: Cornell University PressBicchieri, Cristina (2006) The Grammar Of Society: TheNature And Dynamics Of Social Norms. UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.Card, David Edward. (1995) Myth And Measurement: TheNew Economics Of The Minimum Wage. Princeton:Princeton University Press.Chittick, William: “Recovering the IslamicIntellectual Tradition: Problems andPossibilities.” Conference paper published as“Can the Islamic Intellectual Heritage beRecovered?” Iqbal Review, October 1998, pp. 11-25.

Asad Zaman 38

Halberstam, David (2002) The Best And The Brightest.NY: Random House Digital, Inc.Hodgson, Geoffrey M. (2002) How Economics ForgotHistory: The Problem Of Historical Specificity In Social Science.USA: Routledge.Hodgson, Marshall GS (1974) The Venture of Islam, 3vols. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Karacuka, M and Zaman, A. (2012) “The EmpiricalEvidence Against Neoclassical Utility Theory: AReview of the Literature” International Journal forPluralism in Economics Education Vol. 3 (4) p.366-414Klein, Naomi.(2007) The Shock Doctrine: The Rise OfDisaster Capitalism. NY: MacmillanLedyard, John O. (1995), ‘Public goods: a surveyof experimental research,’ in John H. Kagel, andAlvin E. Roth (Eds.) The Handbook of ExperimentalEconomics, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Manicas, Peter T (1987) A History And Philosophy Of TheSocial Sciences. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Manicas, Peter T. (2006) A Realist Philosophy Of SocialScience: Explanation And Understanding. UK: CambridgeUniversity PressMankiw, N. G., & Taylor, M. P. (2007).Macroeconomics European Edition (PV) 6th edition: VA:WorthPublishers.Mirowski, Phillip (1990) More Heat Than Light UK:Cambridge University Press.


Najam, Adil (2007) Portrait of A Giving Community:Philanthropy by the Pakistani-American Diaspora, Harvard:Harvard University.Pfeifer, Karen (2001) “Islamic business andbusiness as usual: a study of firms in Egypt.”Development in Practice, 11(1), pp. 20-33.Putnam, Hilary (2002) The Collapse Of The Fact/ValueDichotomy: And Other Essays. Harvard University Press,Reuben, Julie A. (1996) The Making Of The ModernUniversity: Intellectual Transformation And The Marginalization OfMorality. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Skinner, Burrhus Frederic (1972) Beyond Freedom AndDignity. New York: Bantam Books.Suppes, Frederick (1977) The Structure of ScientificTheories, 2nd Ed. University of Illinois Press,ChicagoTaleb, Nassim Nicholas.(2010) The Black Swan:: TheImpact of the Highly Improbable Fragility. NY: Random HouseLLC.Wong, Stanley (2002) Foundations of Paul Samuelson'sRevealed Preference Theory: A study by the method of rationalreconstruction. USA: Routledge.Zaman, Asad (2012) “Methodological Mistakes andEconometric Consequences,” International EconometricReview, Vol. 4, Issue 2, p.99-122. Zaman, Asad (Sep 2012) “The Normative Foundationsof Scarcity,” Real-World Economics Review, issue no.61, 26, pp. 22-39

Asad Zaman 40

Zaman, Asad (Apr 2013) “Deification of Scienceand Its Disastrous Consequences,” Available atSSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2260052Zaman, Asad (Dec 2013) "Logical Positivism andIslamic Economics" International Journal of Economics,Management and Accounting (IJEMA). Vol. 21, No. 2,p1-18.

An Islamic Approach to Humanities

Documents